Of Sandy’s potential impact on our Senate race

Why are all those colorful 8-by-10 Elizabeth Warren and Scott Brown election fliers piling up in your mail box this fall?

Itís not because the political consultants have decided to go old school this year.

Rather itís a byproduct of an agreement between the two U.S. Senate candidates to keep super PACS and outside groups from putting attack ads on television and the radio. Dubbed the Peoples Pledge, it requires the candidates to donate half the value of any third partiesí ads to charity from their own campaign funds.

The pledge however did not rule out super PAC and special interest advertising in newspapers, on the Internet or by mail.

While many TV viewers may be getting irritated with the frequency of ads from Brown and Warren, it would be far worse without the pledge, which will face the real test in the final days leading up to the election. At that point either candidate could tolerate a surge in outside TV ads with the consequences coming only after the election is over.

ē

Weather can play a big role in turnout on Election Day, but a storm called Sandy that may or may not slam into New England this week is already impacting what is arguably the biggest Senate race in the country.

Since Thursday the stateís television stations have been using up their prime time newscasts with the storm warning/hype. That has bumped the intensive news coverage of the Brown/Warren campaigns that otherwise might be leading the telecasts.

Both camps are wondering what impact the storm may have on their final debate scheduled to take place Tuesday night in Boston.

Because the debate will be in the WGBH television studios without a large live audience, the sponsors will not have to worry about postponing it to keep the audience off the roads during the storm. In the unlikely event large parts of the state lose power as happened in Tropical Storm Irene last year, viewership could be severely dampened. But as one campaign aide pointed out, through the magic of television it can always be re-aired at a later date if needed.

The storm meanwhile could also put the candidates in the position of trying to capitalize on the weather. Picture either getting blown around on the beach or standing amid downed power lines wearing all-weather gear and demanding that utilities get the power back on. Extended power outages, flooding or other emergency conditions could continue eating up the news hole, shifting attention to recovery efforts instead of the two Senate candidates in the crucial final week.

The Brown camp may be hoping for cold weather so he can start wearing his winter barn jacket that he wore in the final weeks of his January 2010 campaign.

ē

Because the debate will be the last chance the candidates will have to challenge each otherís political positions directly, energize their campaigns and offer closing arguments to voters, everything will be on the line in the one-hour debate moderated by CNNís John King.

It will also be a chance for voters to hear about some issues that it seems neither candidate has wanted to drag out in the open.

One major issue neither candidate has talked about explicitly is the whopping increase in federal taxes that are set to take effect Jan. 1.

For starters there is the end of the Social Security payroll tax holiday, which would cost someone making about $55,000 a year about $1,000 next year, up to twice that if you make up to $113,000 or more. That is on top of the expiration of the Bush Era tax cuts that will cost the average individual worker about $1,400 next year starting New Yearís Day and up to several thousand dollars next year for many middle income households.

There is no clear plan afoot to extend the payroll tax holiday so that tax hike seems a virtual certainty at this time. Meanwhile the candidates have voiced only vague uncertainties over how the Bush era tax cuts will be resolved.

Democrats want to keep the tax cuts for the middle class but not the top 2 percent, while Republicans want to keep the tax cuts for everyone. After two years of fighting over the issue, Congress left Washington this fall taking no action to extend the tax cuts for anyone; because they still disagree on whether to raise taxes on the wealthy.

Brown was not able to cite a figure when asked specifically in Shrewsbury last week if he knew how much those pending tax hikes will cost a typical family in Massachusetts next year. He has said he doesnít want to raise anyoneís taxes, but that proposal has not proven acceptable to Democrats in the Senate and has not led to action to avoid the huge tax increase that is pending. Elizabeth Warren wants to see the middle class keep their tax cuts, but how she expects to get that through a Republican-controlled House that has refused over and over again to raise taxes on the top 2 percent is hard to fathom. The fact is virtually all the Republicans in Congress, including Brown, have signed a pledge not to ever raise taxes, barring them from hiking taxes on the wealthy.

Voters here, many of whom have not had a pay hike in years or have seen their incomes cut sharply as rent, food and fuel costs have skyrocketed, may not be able to stop the tax hikes at the polls next month or afford them next year. But at those prices, they ought to at least be able to get an idea over who to blame for them before they vote.

Another issue that hasnít gotten much discussion in the debates is global warming. Politicians have been having trouble with the concept for decades now, but scientists all around the world are warning about global warming and dire environmental and economic consequences that are developing from excess carbon emissions. John King might want to review CNNís film footage from the Arctic ice cap melting this summer for evidence that those predictions appear to be holding up as he bones up for the debate.

The League of Conservation voters raised the topic last week, complaining that Brown voted to take away EPAís authority to regulate greenhouse gasses in 2011 and that he voted for an amendment that would prohibit any regulations relating to greenhouse gas emissions. That group is among those stuffing mailboxes this week, spending $200,000 to send out 150,000 mailings in the state to link Brown to big oil and his votes on global warming,

That mailing effort however is a drop in the bucket compared to the tens of millions being spent on ads in this campaign. The group gave Brown a 22 percent score on his lifetime environmental scorecard, the lowest ever for a Massachusetts member of Congress. But Mr. Brown maintains he believes global warming is real and man-made. His biggest concern is that more regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions could hurt job growth.

ē

Lt. Gov. Tim Murray hasnít gotten over former Gov. Mitt Romneyís decision to withhold state funding for the Franklin Street Fire Station at the site of the cold storage warehouse fire that claimed the lives of six firefighters in 1999.

He was in New Hampshire this month with a group of Worcester firefighters urging voters to back President Obama in that swing state. Murray said the city had put together $4 million locally and asked the state to chip in $2 million. The Legislature approved the funding in 2004, but Romney vetoed it. Romneyís campaign staff said the governor believed fire stations should be funded locally and it wouldnít be fair to other cities and towns for the state to pay for part of the Worcester station;